Top Law Schools

For example, Superprep B, game 2. I've liked the Manhattan strategy (drawing in/out, letters vertically, arrows for inferences to see the dominoes when scenarios arise) but sometimes, especially when 2 variables are involved for one to be in or out, the graph gets incoherently messy. Has anyone had any success using this method in similar situations, have tips for cleaning it up a bit so it remains a viable tool? Right now, it for the more difficult games it eats up more time than it saves.

Yea I don't really like the Binary Logic chain. Although the new LG's will be giving you a lot more space than before, I went back to just writing out the conditionals but still using the T-charts

chadbrochill wrote:Yea I don't really like the Binary Logic chain. Although the new LG's will be giving you a lot more space than before, I went back to just writing out the conditionals but still using the T-charts

^ This

It depends on the nature of the game; there are games where it's incredibly effective and others where it would waste time setting up the chain. If there are any odd rules that I wouldn't be able to incorporate into the logic chain without it getting confusing, I just write the conditionals instead.

CardozoLaw09 wrote:It depends on the nature of the game; there are games where it's incredibly effective and others where it would waste time setting up the chain. If there are any odd rules that I wouldn't be able to incorporate into the logic chain without it getting confusing, I just write the conditionals instead.

The biggest thing to look out for is dis/conjunctions in the ordering chain. If they aren't in there, it should be pretty straightforward. However, when you have a con/disjunction, it splits the chain, and you have to be careful, especially when taking the contrapositive.

Good discussion. It's definitely our most controversial diagram. I just finished writing a new edition of our LG book (hitting shelves shortly) and I directly address this issue at the end of the chapter on these games. We actually have you practice writing rules to the side if they make things too complex so that's not some sort of panic-inducing moment. When you do write rules to the side, you're basically left with the strategy that most folks use who don't read our books, so it shouldn't be a huge problem as some of those poor souls seem to somehow get into law school.

There are also games for which the chain doesn't lead to amazing pinball inferences (for example, if most of the rules go in one direction), but in those cases, the visual layout is helpful for seeing the game's big picture, and the act of writing a rule into a chain is actually the same thing as writing it out outside of the chain. So, no real time lost. In the end though, the chain destroys so many games, and is neutral to slightly helpful for a few games, that we are confident it's the way to go. But, whatever works for you is clearly the way to go (by the way, there is someone reading this who is tempted to reply "I don't know why you all bother with diagrams, just read the game and answer the questions, and to you, on behalf of regular people who aren't blessed with a naturally obscene talent for LG, I say "fuck you").

I am glad the new LG layout will leave folks with lots of room to doodle...

Feel free to PM me if you have an embarrassing LG question that should be covered by student-teacher confidentiality rules.

Manhattan LSAT Noah wrote:Good discussion. It's definitely our most controversial diagram. I just finished writing a new edition of our LG book (hitting shelves shortly) and I directly address this issue at the end of the chapter on these games. We actually have you practice writing rules to the side if they make things too complex so that's not some sort of panic-inducing moment. When you do write rules to the side, you're basically left with the strategy that most folks use who don't read our books, so it shouldn't be a huge problem as some of those poor souls seem to somehow get into law school.

There are also games for which the chain doesn't lead to amazing pinball inferences (for example, if most of the rules go in one direction), but in those cases, the visual layout is helpful for seeing the game's big picture, and the act of writing a rule into a chain is actually the same thing as writing it out outside of the chain. So, no real time lost. In the end though, the chain destroys so many games, and is neutral to slightly helpful for a few games, that we are confident it's the way to go. But, whatever works for you is clearly the way to go (by the way, there is someone reading this who is tempted to reply "I don't know why you all bother with diagrams, just read the game and answer the questions, and to you, on behalf of regular people who aren't blessed with a naturally obscene talent for LG, I say "fuck you").

I am glad the new LG layout will leave folks with lots of room to doodle...

Feel free to PM me if you have an embarrassing LG question that should be covered by student-teacher confidentiality rules.

Awesome.

If you are like me (starting to get to the end of PS LG Bible and are considering picking up the MLSAT LG-- or any MLSAT books) then you might find this thread useful: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=162722

It highlights a few basic differences between what to find in Powerscore vs Manhattan books

PS If anyone else has thoughts on differences please share or add them to the link above, I am interested.